Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1887-02-26
THE ROovER CASE ARGUED.
Judge speer Reserves His Decision
Until Next Week.

Judge speer Reserves His Decision
Until Next Week.
The argument on rule to show cause
why writ OF habeas corpus should not
be issued for l.. l.. Hoover was heard yes
terday by Judge Speer in the United
States District Court. Hoover was rep
resented by c. n. West, Esq. His COM
plant was that he had been sentenced in
the Superior Court TO pay heavy fine or
serve six months in jail for
selling liquor without having a
license from the County Commissioners.
AIR. West argued that the act of 1885, CIV
ing the County Commissioners authority
to grant or refuse an application for a
liquor license, Is unconstitutional. His
ground was that the statute abridges the
rights OF citizens in direct opposition to
the intention of the fourteenth amend
ment to the constitution of the United
States.
Hoover's place of business was in Chat
ham county, but outside Of the corporate
limits Of Savannah. Had he lived in the
city he would have had the privilege Of
going to the City Treasurer, and, by pay
ing 5000, to have obtained license to sell
within the corporate limits. Ordinarily,
where The question of discretion is al
lowed the commissioners or supervisors,
the granting OF license is made
dependent upon the applicants char
acter, and the discretion is Of
judicial nature, counsel argued.
Proper character was not a qualification,
however, in the Hoover case, he added.
Proceeding, he said:
81 assert that the question OF selling
liquor at all within the county, outside
Of the city, has been discussed before
Chatham county's Board of Commission
ers, and the members came to the conclu-
sion that they would not grant licenses.
and that thereby the sale of liquor would
be virtually prohibited. That authority
is certainly beyond what was cOntem-
plated by the State Legislature. In point
of law the sale Of liquor IN Georgia is not
an odious, obnoxious or Illegal traffic.
since it is directly sanctioned by the con-
stltution of the State"
The speech tor the granting of the writ
lasted two hours, and was an interesting
and logical argument.
Solicitor General duBignon, in oppos-
ing the granting of the writ, said cit has
been expressly ruled that the sale of
liquor is not one of the rights and prIyi-
leges granted by the constitution of the
United States, and which the States are
forbidden to abridge. The Supreme Court
has decided that State can absolutely
prohibit the sale OF imported liquor after
the original package leaves the hands of
He then reasoned that Hoover had no
right to sell liquor, and it was only his
privilege when the Commissioners saw fit
TO grant that. The Solicitor General pro-
ceeded to argue that when Hoover was
refused his license he should have applied
to the United States Court for "A man.
damus to compel the Commissioners to
grant the license, that is il he was enti-
tied by the constitution of the United
States to the right TO sell liquor. Instead
OF doing that he went ahead and engaged
in an illegal traffic.
The State Legislature, no said, had the
power to absolutely prohibit the sale Of
liquors within its boundaries, and the
Supreme Court OF the United States has
so decided. III 1t can do that, can it not
then declare that liquors shall not be sold
without the corporate limits of cities?
The Ordinary of a county can refuse
license IL an applicant comes with the
signature of two-thirds OF the citizens or
the county, and the Supreme Court OF
Georgia has said that the urdinary's ex-
erclse of his discretion is not renewable.
Many authorities and cases in point
were cited by each side.
At The conclusion of the argument
Judge Speer stated that he would reserve
his decision until Tuesday.